The Fed's latest decision is leaving open a window of opportunity that many Americans may be ignoring
While markets are clamoring for cuts, there's an opportunity for consumers amid higher rates.
A study shows that US households might missing out on big savings.
Fed Chair Jerome Powell confirmed what markets already suspected on Wednesday, leaving the benchmark rate unchanged, despite pressure from President Donald Trump.
With no Fed meeting scheduled for August, all eyes are on the possibility of a September rate cut. But the time between now and then may be the last opportunity for consumers to take advantage of an opportunity created by elevated interest rates.
A study from savings marketplace Raisin said that 84% of Americans do not actively search for better savings rates, even if they could be saving substantially by opting for a different annual percentage yield.
The study found that many American households have the potential to save substantially.
"The average APY on Americans' savings accounts is .58% but they could be earning upwards of 4% APY — which amounts to nearly 7x more in interest each year," the study said, adding that the difference for a household with $10,000 in savings amounts to earning $400 versus $58.
Put simply, if every American household were to opt for higher-yield savings, it could lead to as much as $396 billion per year for consumers.
"Rates really start to come down once we get into the fall," Shana Hennigan, chief business office at Raisin, told Business Insider. "With that backdrop, while consumers still have the opportunity, this might be the time to strike."
If Powell and the central bank cut rates in September, the window to see that kind of yield on savings accounts could be closing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
18 minutes ago
- CNBC
Robotaxis are becoming a reality. Who's poised to win in China and beyond
After years of testing, robotaxis are starting to become a normal part of transportation in certain parts of the U.S. and China, where a handful of companies are competing to become market leaders. In the U.S., Alphabet's Waymo has pulled ahead of its rivals and says it has more than 1,500 robotaxis on the road conducting more than 250,000 paid weekly trips in cities including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix and Austin, Texas. Tesla has just gotten started in Austin . In China, there are proibably about 2,000 robotaxis, primarily operated by a few local companies across the country's larger cities, according to Barclays estimates published last week. The British bank forecasts at least 300,000 robotaxis will be deployed in China by 2030, accounting for at least 5% of on-demand transportation in larger cities. China's capital Beijing has allowed robotaxi operators to charge fares for rides in a suburb since late 2021 . Shanghai in late July became the latest region to allow fully autonomous taxis to charge fares in parts of the city . Pony AI unique U.S.-listed Chinese startup Pony AI is so far the only robotaxi operator in the country that can charge the public for fares in parts of all four of China's largest cities: Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen. The company hasn't disclosed how many cars it has running, but claims each car receives an average of 15 orders a day. "We believe this milestone [in Shanghai] demonstrates Pony's technological and operational readiness in [the] robotaxi business," Bank Of America analysts said in a report last week. "Pony will scale up its Robotaxi fleet size and see improving profitability, given better economies of scale and unit profitability," the analysts said. Bank of America rates the stock a buy, and gives the American depositary receipts a price target of $21, or more than 60% upside from Friday's close. Improving safety Pony AI Chief Technology Officer Tiancheng Lou said in a late July interview that his focus now is on improving safety, speeding up the ability to hail a robotaxi and cutting costs. The company has started testing its latest-generation robotaxi vehicles in Beijing, claiming to have slashed the cost of the parts needed to build its autonomous driving kit by 70% . Pony AI is set to report its next quarterly results on Aug. 12. Pony's U.S.-listed rival WeRide last Thursday said that its robotaxi revenue in the second quarter rose to a a record $6.4 million . Morgan Stanley rates WeRide a buy, but expects shares to "remain event-driven and show more volatility" subject to robotaxi developments in China and overseas. The bank does not cover "We believe progress in global development of robotaxis will expedite the pace of China's development/rollout of L4 AD/robotaxis," the Morgan Stanley analysts said, adding they do not think legacy global automakers and legislators in major economies "will risk missing out on the transition to vehicle autonomy, particularly after losing ground to China on EVs." Waymo expansion While Waymo has only just begun expanding internationally, entering the Japanese market, Chinese robotaxi operators are already pushing into Europe and the Middle East. WeRide claims it's the only company with autonomous driving permits in Saudi Arabia, China, the UAE, Singapore, France and the U.S. Outside China, WeRide said it has already started pilot operations in Riyadh with Uber Technologies . In mid-July, Chinese internet tech company Baidu reached a deal to offer its Apollo Go self-driving vehicles on the Uber ride-hailing platform, aiming for the Middle East and Asia later this year. The U.S. and mainland China, where ride-hailing app Didi acquired Uber's business, are not part of the deal. Apollo Go's pricing on Uber will likely compare to that of human drivers on Uber, Bank of America analysts said in a separate report last month. "Therefore, we think value in [the] overseas market could be multiple times higher than China, hence its profitability overseas could have much larger room." Bank of America rated Baidu a buy, with a $100 price target. Baidu is set to report results on Aug. 20. Baidu breakeven Barclays estimates that Baidu is probably already breaking even on its robotaxis in the Chinese city of Wuhan, excluding research and investment costs. Most Chinese robotaxi operators are also close to breaking even, the analysts said. "Being able to design and build cheap robotaxi models is the single largest reason why we think Chinese players are likely to reach [unit economics] breakeven (excluding R & D and other headquarters costs) by the end of 2025," the Barclays analysts said. The bank estimates each Waymo car currently costs $200,000, Baidu's Apollo RT6 costs about $37,000, newest vehicle runs at about $42,000 and WeRide slightly more. —CNBC's Michael Bloom contributed to this report.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Don't blame Jerome Powell — or the Fed — if you can't afford to buy a house right now
Has Trump got the wrong guy? President Donald Trump has cast Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's reluctance to lower interest rates as the biggest obstacle to aspiring home buyers. 'I told him that wouldn't fly': My 90-year-old mother's adviser pushed her to change her beneficiaries. What is going on? Bonds and the dollar are sounding the alarm about the U.S. economy. Stock investors might want to heed the warning. Older adults on 'edge of poverty' lose jobs and funding as new Medicaid and SNAP work requirements loom Shop Top Mortgage Rates A quicker path to financial freedom Your Path to Homeownership Personalized rates in minutes 'People aren't able to buy a house because this guy is a numbskull,' Trump said of Powell ahead of Wednesday's Fed policy meeting, where the central bank left its benchmark interest rate unchanged despite pressure from Trump to cut borrowing costs. Trump has said repeatedly that high interest rates are blocking Americans from buying houses. But Powell is not the main reason so few people can afford to buy a home right now, experts told MarketWatch. With so little supply, home prices have shot up to all-time highs. The market is too expensive for both renters trying to buy their first homes and repeat buyers who want to upgrade or downsize. And many of those existing homeowners can't afford to let go of their low mortgage rates, fueling the so-called lock-in effect. Yes, elevated mortgage rates are part of the reason buying a home is unaffordable for so many. Most people in the U.S. take out a mortgage when they buy a house. In 2024, 91% of first-time buyers financed their home with a mortgage, according to the National Association of Realtors. For those people, higher mortgage rates have been a barrier. The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 6.72% as of July 31, according to Freddie Mac. The 30-year rate has been in this range for a while, hovering above 6% for most of the last three years. That's a big jump from years past. A home buyer purchasing a $400,000 home with a 15% down payment and a 30-year mortgage rate of 3% — a common rate during the pandemic — would pay about $2,000 per month. With a 7% mortgage rate, that monthly payment would be nearly $2,800. Trump has repeatedly singled out Powell, saying in a July 18 Truth Social post that Powell and the Fed 'are choking out the housing market with their high rate, making it difficult for people, especially the young, to buy a house.' A week later, the president said that housing in the U.S. was 'lagging because Jerome 'Too Late' Powell refuses to lower Interest Rates.' But mortgage rates don't directly follow the direction of the Fed's benchmark short-term interest rate. Instead, they tend to move in tandem with the yield on the 10-year Treasury note BX:TMUBMUSD10Y, which typically rises when investors see inflation ahead. When the 10-year yield rises, so does the 30-year mortgage rate. However, the timing of Powell's decision to raise interest rates from pandemic-era lows did contribute to housing-affordability challenges by making mortgage rates more volatile, said Michael Fratantoni, the chief economist of the Mortgage Bankers Association, an industry trade group. 'The Federal Reserve was late to increase rates in 2022,' Fratantoni told MarketWatch. 'If they had moved more quickly, they likely would not have needed to raise rates to the same extent. So there is some culpability for the extent of rate volatility we experienced.' See also: Asked at this week's Fed policy meeting about 7% mortgage rates and housing affordability, Powell said he doesn't believe the Fed plays the central role in those issues. 'We don't set mortgage rates at the Fed,' Powell said in response to a question during the Wednesday press conference. 'It's not that we don't have any effect. We do have an effect. But we're not the main effect.' The current housing-affordability crisis is more about the 'long-term housing shortage that we have,' Powell added. 'We haven't built enough housing. This is not something the Fed can help with. And that'll be the case even after things normalize.' 'So I think the best thing that we can do for housing is to have 2% inflation and maximum employment. And that's what we can contribute to housing,' Powell said. Some don't agree with that analysis. Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte, a Trump ally who has also repeatedly attacked Powell for not cutting interest rates, wrote on X in response to Powell's comment that 'The Fed has EVERYTHING to do with Housing.' The Fed has more impact on the housing market than its officials would like to think, said David Dworkin, president and chief executive of the National Housing Conference, a left-leaning nonprofit advocacy group. The Fed's interest-rate policy directly affects home builders' borrowing costs, which in turn affects how many new homes are built. The Fed's holdings of mortgage-backed securities also have an impact on mortgage rates. In theory, if the Fed buys up more mortgage-backed securities, that in turn could push mortgage rates down. But the Fed has not been doing this. It has been trying to trim its balance sheet by letting those securities mature and roll off. The reality is that lower mortgage rates wouldn't be enough to solve affordability issues, experts told MarketWatch. While lower rates might make it more affordable to buy a home with a mortgage, the housing market's affordability crisis is also fueled by high home prices. Those rising prices are driven by a mismatch between supply and demand. Even as home sales are running at the slowest pace in 30 years, home prices continue to reach record highs. The median price of an existing home sold this June was $435,300. Putting aside pandemic boom towns and the Sun Belt, where builders have been able to boost construction of new homes, most markets are still undersupplied. The pace of home building is still far below where it was two decades ago, prior to the Great Recession, and has not recovered fully. That's in spite of demand skyrocketing over the years across most markets. Even current homeowners, who have benefited from significant home-price appreciation, face a tough market. Many bought their homes when both mortgage rates and home prices were significantly lower. To sell now would mean confronting a market that has become much more expensive — and that doesn't incentivize them to move. Hence, 'rate cuts alone aren't enough,' Amy Nixon, a housing economist and a contributor at MacroEdge Research, noted in a post on X. 'We need lower prices and consistently higher wages,' she wrote. 'Some regions still need more inventory too.' For a typical house to become affordable to a buyer, the 30-year mortgage rate would need to drop to an 'unrealistic' 4.43%, according to a recent report by the real-estate platform Zillow ZG. The last time the 30-year rate was at that level was in March 2022. In response to a request for comment, a White House spokesperson said the Trump administration's efforts to address housing affordability aren't focused only on interest rates. 'The Trump administration's push to restore the American Dream of homeownership goes beyond interest rates,' spokesperson Kush Desai told MarketWatch. 'Rapid deregulation to expand new home construction, historic working-class tax relief through The One Big Beautiful Bill, and America First trade deals that level the playing field for American workers reflect the Administration's two-pronged approach of cutting costs while raising wages for everyday Americans.' The other option to make housing more affordable is for home prices to fall. But that's equally unrealistic, according to Zillow. 'If rates and other factors held steady, home values would need to drop 18% for the typical home to be affordable for a median-income family,' the company said. And falling home prices is not necessarily a positive trend. 'The bulk of people in the U.S. don't have massive equity-market portfolios,' James Knightley, chief international economist at ING, previously told MarketWatch. 'The bulk of people's wealth is overwhelmingly in their property and their pension fund as well.' Most middle-income families pay more attention to the value of their home than the value of their stock-market portfolio, Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics MCO, told MarketWatch. So when home prices fall or are poised to fall, Knightley said, 'I am a little bit nervous' that those declines could negatively hurt consumers' outlook regarding the economy and their interest in spending. And that could start to weigh down the U.S. economy. 'We need a multifaceted all-of-government approach to addressing a housing-affordability crisis, which has become mainstreamed across America,' Dworkin said. 'We need to build more housing, and we need to build housing that's affordable to first-time homebuyers. But we need to do it in a way that doesn't depreciate home prices.' Two bills recently introduced in Congress seek to address housing affordability. One would eliminate capital-gains taxes on home sales; another would try to boost new-home construction by cutting red tape. 'We didn't get into this because of one policy, and we're not going to get out of this because of one policy,' Dworkin added. Read more: Republicans and Democrats are joining forces to fix America's housing affordability crisis. Here's what's in their plan. So what could Powell do at this point to address the stagnant housing market? 'At this point, it would be best for housing markets if the Fed meets their mandates: conducting monetary policy in a manner that results in price stability and maximum employment,' the MBA's Fratantoni said. 'If the Fed gets monetary policy right over time, longer-term rates like mortgage rates will be lower and more stable on average,' he added. And 'that would benefit housing affordability.' Jim Bullard, the former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, told MarketWatch in an April interview that he was 'a little bit pessimistic about housing.' 'I think it has gotten quite a ways away from a steady state. And it's going to take a long time [to fix because] it's a slow-moving market. We just didn't build enough houses after the global financial crisis,' he said. 'It is going to take a long time to come back into equilibrium.' What personal-finance issues would you like to see covered in MarketWatch? We would like to hear from readers about their financial decisions and money-related questions. You can fill out or write to us at . A reporter may be in touch to learn more. MarketWatch will not attribute your answers to you by name without your permission. 'I have never been asked for money before': My friend wants to borrow $1,600 to pay her rent. Do I say yes? I'm trustee of $65,000 going to my nephew. What are the rules for what I can do with the money? This trader is sounding the alarm over stocks. Why he's pressing the sell button 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
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Who Would Benefit the Most From Trump's $1K Baby Savings Accounts?
Now that President Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' has been signed into law, many families with newborns can expect to receive $1,000 to invest in their child's future. Referred to as 'Trump Accounts,' they're designed to encourage families to begin investing in a child's future from birth and enjoy the benefits of compound interest. Read Next: Explore More: But is everyone really going to benefit from this plan? Let's explore the details of these Trump Accounts and who they could be most useful for. Who Is Eligible for the $1K? With these accounts, every child born a U.S. citizen with a Social Security number between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028, will receive a $1,000 deposit from the U.S. government into the account. Find Out: How Will Trump Accounts Work? Setting up your newborn for a Trump Account can be done in a couple of different ways. Parents or guardians can open the account in their child's name. If not, the Treasury Department could open it, per Kiplinger. Once the account is open, $1,000 will be deposited for those who qualify. There are some restrictions on these accounts that parents should be aware of. There will be a $5,000 yearly contribution limit for each year before the child turns 18. No distributions are allowed until the first day of the year when the child turns 18. After the child turns 18, the account will follow traditional IRA rules. All contributions made to the account before the child's 18th year will be made with after-tax dollars. This means parents will not be able to deduct their contributions from their taxes. Accounts can be used for college expenses, to start a business or to purchase a home. Who Would Benefit From Trump Accounts? Who would benefit from these Trump Accounts will be something that's heavily debated. 'The $1,000 baby savings account is a simple but powerful idea,' said Tim Rosenberger, fellow at the Manhattan Institute. 'It gives every American child, not just those born into privilege, a small but meaningful stake in the nation's future. That's the kind of ownership society that puts America first.' According to Rosenberg, this could benefit working families. 'A universal savings account at birth offers a new kind of opportunity infrastructure. It won't solve every problem, but it's a strong first signal that the country is serious about helping working families build intergenerational stability,' he said. While these accounts may be a good first step, however, they may not always provide the best option for saving for a child's future. 'Everyone eligible for the $1,000 should make sure they get it, but that alone is not enough to set aside for your kids' education or set them up for generational wealth,' said Dave Fortin, co-founder and investment advisor with FutureMoney. '529 plans are a better option than Trump accounts if you're saving for education. When you make a qualified withdrawal from a 529 plan, it's tax-free and penalty-free. Trump accounts are tax-deferred, meaning when the withdrawal eventually happens, the money counts as ordinary income, so income taxes are owed.' Ultimately, while all eligible families should take advantage of the free money being offered, it's important to consider the long-term implications. Before making additional contributions, make sure the account aligns with your child's savings goals. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 25 Places To Buy a Home If You Want It To Gain Value 6 Big Shakeups Coming to Social Security in 2025 This article originally appeared on Who Would Benefit the Most From Trump's $1K Baby Savings Accounts? Sign in to access your portfolio
