U.S. job growth expected to have slowed in June as economy sends mixed signals
Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal forecast that 110,000 new payrolls were added in June. That would be the fewest since February, and it would be the fourth monthly decline in the past six months. The unemployment rate, meanwhile, was expected to have climbed to 4.3%, the highest since October 2021.
Consumers and businesses are still grappling with the uncertainty caused by President Donald Trump's policies, something further reflected in volatile data.
On one hand, the inflation rate has so far proven stable, while average earnings continue to grow at a healthy clip. Stocks have returned to all-time highs, and in testimony last week, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell described overall economic conditions as 'solid.'
'Look at labor force participation, look at wages, look at job creation,' Powell said. 'They're all at healthy levels now. I would say you can see perhaps a very, very slow continued cooling but nothing that's troubling at this time.'
On the other hand, Powell's assertions have not sat well with Trump, who has continued to harangue him to lower the federal interest rate. On Wednesday evening, the president said Powell should "resign immediately."
Commentary from U.S. firms and various other data points paint a more worrisome portrait of the economy. The latest survey of manufacturers from the Institute for Supply Chain Management found some firms describing the business environment as 'hellacious' and 'too volatile' for long-term procurement decisions.
On Wednesday, the private payrolls processor ADP reported a net decline in jobs added, which hasn't occurred since March 2023 — and before that, the depths of the Covid-19 pandemic. The May job growth figure was revised even lower, to just 29,000 jobs added, from 37,000.
'Though layoffs continue to be rare, a hesitancy to hire and a reluctance to replace departing workers led to job losses last month,' Nela Richardson, ADP's chief economist, said in a news release published Wednesday morning.
Clarity about tariffs was supposed to have arrived by next week, with Trump having set July 9 as the deadline to negotiate new deals. While he said this week he does not plan to extend the deadline, the White House said last week that the key date was 'not critical.'
Meanwhile, Trump's tax cut and spending bill continues to be debated in Congress even as it has cleared some key hurdles.
'Companies need business visibility in taxes and policy if they are going to take the risk of hiring a new employee,' Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer of Bleakley Financial Group, wrote in a note to clients. 'And tariffs, on again/off again, have just thrown mud into the gears of business activity.'
The ADP report has a mixed track record of predicting the official BLS figure, which is usually published a day or two later. Earlier in the week, the BLS reported data showing a somewhat more sound picture of the job market, with job openings having unexpectedly increased in June.
Yet, even then, the bulk of those openings were in the leisure and hospitality sector, while openings declined in manufacturing and professional and business services.
'The leisure/hospitality sector alone cannot support the labor market amidst a broader weakening,' analysts with Citi Research wrote in a note to clients.
An additional hiring report released this week by the job consultancy Challenger, Gray and Christmas showed that through June, U.S. employers have announced 82,932 planned hires, a 19% increase over the 69,920 announced at this point in 2024.
Yet that rate remains historically low, it said.
'Hiring announcements in 2025 suggest a cautious but stabilizing labor market,' firm Senior Vice President Andrew Challenger said in a release. 'While companies are clearly adding workers at a higher rate than in 2024, the restraint shown relative to previous years indicates continued uncertainty around costs, automation, and the broader economic outlook. Without a strong economic driver, hiring may remain measured through the rest of the year.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
40 minutes ago
- NBC News
Retailers avoided a worst case scenario in Vietnam. But executives say Trump's trade deal could still hit consumers.
The retail industry is breathing a sigh of relief after it appeared to avoid the worst case scenario on Vietnam tariffs. But some executives believe the tentative trade deal President Donald Trump announced Wednesday is still bad for business and could have a chilling effect on consumer spending. 'It's a lot better news than where we were on Liberation Day,' one CEO of a popular consumer brand told CNBC after Trump said tariffs on Vietnamese imports would be 20%, down from the 46% levy he proposed on April 2, then later suspended. The new rate would be double the 10% duty currently in place. Another executive called the news 'bad' but agreed that a 20% tariff was better than the 46% duty Trump originally imposed, however unrealistic the proposed rate was. 'I guess Trump needs 'positive' news,' a third executive said. 'I think things are going to evolve. Let's see if this is definitive.' Trump's announcement on Wednesday came only days before the 90-day suspension of the steep tariffs he proposed in April expires next week, and as his administration scrambles to strike agreements with dozens of trading partners. Even so, he did not say when the deal with Vietnam would take effect, or whether both sides have agreed to the tariff rates. In the months between Trump's April 2 tariff rollout and his announcement on Wednesday, retail executives in the apparel and footwear industries fretted over the potential that Vietnam imports could face tariffs nearly as high as the cumulative 55% duties for Chinese imports. Over the last decade, some of America's top retailers, including Gap, American Eagle and Nike, have all reduced their reliance on China to shield themselves from both high tariffs and the region's geopolitical turbulence. Many sought refuge in Vietnam, where the factories, some owned by Chinese businesses, are known to produce products at a similar quality and price as China. They also started manufacturing in other countries in southeast Asia, such as Cambodia, Bangladesh and Malaysia. Those countries were facing tariffs of 49%, 37% and 24%, respectively, under Trump's April plan, but are subject to a 10% duty for now. Vietnam is now the second largest supplier for footwear, apparel and accessories sold into the U.S. market, according to the industry trade group the American Apparel & Footwear Association. It has become an essential part of the footwear supply chain, on pace to become the largest supplier of shoes to the U.S. in 2025, according to the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, another industry trade group. If Trump's proposed 46% tariff on Vietnam had taken effect, it would mean much of the industry's work to leave China would have been for naught. Some companies are relieved the tentative deal would set the levy at 20% and the announcement agreement is also a sign that Cambodia, Malaysia and Bangladesh could reach similar frameworks. 'Twenty percent is a sigh of relief,' said Sonia Lapinsky, a partner and managing director at AlixPartners who advises fashion brands. 'There's some positivity and some optimism that this is manageable. So at least there's that. This isn't business destroying, which is great. However, this does have real implications, right?' Most companies have plenty of tools to offset the impact of tariffs, such as working with their suppliers to share costs. But to avoid major hits to their profit margins, many including Nike are planning to raise prices. It's still unclear how those hikes will affect consumer spending because it will take time for the increases to trickle down in the supply chain. AlixPartners previously created pricing models for CNBC that examined how the price of Vietnamese-made sweaters and shoes could rise under Trump's proposed tariffs — if retailers do not pass any of the cost on to suppliers or shoppers. At a 10% levy, the cost of a $95 pair of men's shoes could rise by $7.42 to $102.42. With a 20% duty in place, the cost increase would be even larger. Many executives worry any tariff hike of this magnitude will be bad for businesses and consumers. Paul Cosaro, the CEO of Picnic Time, a supplier to top retailers like Target, Kohl's and Macy's, said if the clocks were wound back to April and Trump said there'd be a 20% tariff on Vietnamese imports, 'no one would've been happy.' 'There could be threats of a 46% tariff and you come back with 20 and it's going to sound better but… it's just more money coming out of the consumers' pockets at the end of the day and they have less money to spend on picnic baskets and coolers and things like that,' said Cosaro, who raised his prices between 11% and 14% earlier this year to offset the cost of China tariffs. 'It's not good for the consumer. Ultimately, it's just increasing the prices … I don't think that's good news.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
US adds 147,000 jobs in June, surpassing expectations amid Trump trade war
The US economy added 147,000 jobs in June, a sign of continuing strength in the labor market amid Donald Trump's trade war. The number of jobs added surpassed expectations, as economists largely anticipated a drop in openings. Instead, 3,000 more jobs were added in June compared with May, according to new job figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The unemployment rate actually decreased to 4.1%, down from 4.2% in May. Job gains were seen in state government and healthcare, which saw increases of 47,000 and 39,000 jobs, respectively. Meanwhile, federal government job losses continued, with another 7,000 roles down in June, as the Trump administration continues to cut jobs. The total job loss in the federal government has been 69,000 since January. Though the president's tariffs have rocked the US stock market, which has seen a dramatic rebound after dipping down 15% in the spring, economists have been worrying that the labor market has just been slower to show sensitivity to the tariffs. New data had shown employers showing signs of hesitancy. The payroll firm ADP found that the private sector lost 33,000 jobs in June, far below the 100,000 increase that was expected, and the first decrease since March 2023. The dip in job openings does no necessarily mean companies are laying off more workers; rather, they are creating fewer new positions. 'Though layoffs continue to be rare, a hesitancy to hire and a reluctance to replace departing workers led to job losses last month,' said Nela Richardson, chief economist at ADP, in a statement. John Waldron, president of Goldman Sachs, said the American economy was 'breaking more to the positive' than many expected after Trump unveiled sweeping tariffs in early April. 'The US economy is surprisingly resilient, both in terms of consumer spend [and] the labor dynamic,' Waldron told reporters on Thursday. 'And just general economic economic activity is stronger than one might have guessed if you were sitting here on April 3, projecting what the tariff policy would deliver.' Data from BLS that measures job openings and turnovers in the labor market found that while job openings had climbed in May, to its highest level since November, the vast majority of openings were concentrated in the leisure and hospitality industry. Economists with Citigroup said the spike in new jobs could be temporary as companies opened new positions in response to Trump's crackdown on immigrants, fearing that immigrant employees could lose work permits. The White House has spent the last few months downplaying the impact tariffs have on the domestic economy, despite anxiety from consumers and businesses over the impact tariffs have on prices. The deadline for Trump's 90-day pause on some of his highest tariffs is scheduled to expire next week, as the White House tries to broker deals with dozens of countries that could face high tariffs. The White House announced on Tuesday a deal with Vietnam, whose products were scheduled to face a 46% tariff. The country agreed to a 20% tariff rate, with no tariffs placed on US exports. The deal with Vietnam follows deals Trump has made with the UK and China, but there are dozens of other countries whose exports could face high tariffs without a deal. Amid economic uncertainty, Trump has tried to pass blame on to the Federal Reserve and its chair, Jerome Powell. On Monday, Trump sent an open letter to Powell demanding that the Fed lower interest rates. 'He's costing us a fortune because he keeps the rate way up,' Trump wrote on social media. Powell, in turn, has said that the Fed has not lowered interest rates because of economic uncertainty caused by Trump's tariffs. 'In effect, we went on hold when we saw the size of the tariffs,' Powell said. 'Essentially all inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
CBS News anchor swipes at parent company for settling Trump lawsuit ‘it said is without basis in law and fact'
John Dickerson ended Wednesday's broadcast of CBS Evening News by subtly swiping at the network's corporate boss Paramount for shelling out $16 million to settle Donald Trump's lawsuit over a 60 Minutes interview, noting that the company itself said the president's case 'is without basis in law and fact.' The veteran anchor's commentary was even more pointed on the show he hosts for the network's streaming platform, as he noted that the settlement 'poses a new obstacle' for the network's journalists. 'Can you hold power to account after paying it millions? Can an audience trust you when it thinks you've traded away that trust?' Dickerson pondered. Journalists and free speech advocates have absolutely pilloried Paramount for capitulating to the media-bashing president in a case that legal experts described as frivolous and the network's own lawyers said was completely without merit, warning that it sets an increasingly dangerous precedent. 'Behavior that gets rewarded gets repeated,' the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression stated. 'This settlement will only embolden the president to continue his flurry of baseless lawsuits against the press — and against the American people's ability to hear the news free from government intrusion.' Beyond that, the company is facing the threat of civil litigation and congressional probes over allegations that it violated anti-bribery statutes, as Paramount needs the Trump administration to approve its massive $8.4 billion merger with Skydance Media. Paramount, for its part, has insisted that the lawsuit is 'completely separate from, and unrelated to' the transaction and the FCC approval process. At the end of Wednesday's telecast of CBS Evening News, Dickerson delivered a fairly straightforward recap of the settlement and what led up to it, which was the editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then-Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris just ahead of the 2024 election. 'Under the terms of the settlement worked out with a mediator, Paramount will pay $16 million to cover Mr. Trump's legal costs. Whatever's left will go to his presidential library. No money will be paid directly to the president,' Dickerson noted. 'The settlement does not require an apology or expression of regret for the editing of the interview, which was done in accordance with long-held CBS News standards and widely accepted journalistic practices.' The news host also pointed out that despite Trump's allegations that CBS ran a different portion of Harris' answer to a question during a Face the Nation promotional clip to make her look better, the network has repeatedly denied this. Additionally, Dickerson explained that the 60 Minutes transcript revealed that the president falsely claimed the network had pulled a response from another question asked of Harris and 'deceptively edited' it in. After telling viewers that a senior Paramount executive told shareholders this week that the corporation only settled to avoid what he called the 'high and somewhat unpredictable costs of legal defense, Dickerson brought up that this took place as the company is looking to close the Skydance merger. 'That deal needs Trump administration approval,' he concluded. 'The corporation said the settlement of the Trump lawsuit is completely separate from and unrelated to the merger. In the end, Paramount decided to settle a suit it said is without basis in law and fact and an affront to the First Amendment.' Over on CBS Evening News Plus, which airs on Paramount's streamers, Dickerson was even less sparing in his criticism of the network's corporate overlords. 'We pride ourselves on our BS detector, so it ought to work on ourselves, too. When it doesn't, the stakes are real, a loss of public trust, the spread of misinformation,' he said in a monologue focused on Paramount's payoff to the president. 'A visitor to our newsrooms might wonder why we debate a single word for so long, why it takes hours to answer the simple question, what is this story about, why there's a cry of frustration when a detail is off by an inch,' Dickerson continued. 'That is what it looks like when it is deeply felt, when the audience's concerns become ours, passed by bucket brigade from the subjects of our stories to correspondents, to producers, to editors, fact-checkers, and writers.' Noting that the 'obstacles to getting it right are many,' he then declared that the settlement 'poses a new obstacle' before asking: 'Can you hold power to account after paying it millions? Can an audience trust you when it thinks you've traded away that trust?' In the end, he pointed out, 'the audience will decide that' and that job of CBS News' journalists is 'to show up' and 'honor what we witness on behalf of the people we witness it for.' The conglomerate, which is hoping to complete its merger later this month, could soon be staring down lawsuits and investigations over claims that it 'bribed' the president in order to push the Skydance deal through. 'Today is a dark day for press freedom. Paramount's spineless decision to settle Trump's baseless and patently unconstitutional lawsuit is an insult to the journalists of '60 Minutes' and an invitation to Trump to continue targeting other news outlets,' Freedom of the Press Foundation said in a statement. The advocacy group is also gearing up to pursue legal action on behalf of shareholders to 'stop this affront' and hold the company's board accountable. Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who had warned Paramount in May that a settlement could potentially violate laws against bribery, promised to challenge the settlement in both Congress and the courts. 'This looks like bribery in plain sight,' Warren said on Wednesday. 'Paramount folded at the same time it needs Trump's approval for a billion-dollar merger. I'm calling for an investigation into whether any anti-bribery laws were broken, and I'm working on a new bill to rein in this kind of corruption.' Meanwhile, CBS News staffers past and present are expressing despair and fear over what the settlement means for the once-revered network and its newsmagazine, which has already lost two respected newsroom leaders due to tensions surrounding the company's handling of the lawsuit. 'No one is a fan of Shari right now,' one network staffer told The Independent, referencing Paramount chair Shari Redstone, who was the driving force behind the decision to settle. 'People are still angry and frustrated and morale is very low.' Former CBS News correspondent Armen Keteyian called the settlement 'the nadir for the network' and 'a breach of the public trust Murrow, Cronkite, Hewitt and thousands of us worked decades to build.'
