Latest news with #ScottAnderson
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Retail Sales Jump in June as Consumers Look Past Tariffs
Key Takeaways U.S. retail sales jumped by 0.6% in June to surge past economists expectations, coming after sales fell in May. Another steady increase in the 'control group' showed that consumer health has remained strong despite concerns over tariffs. While sales rose, the increase came as prices also moved higher, which could indicate that consumer spending wasn't as improved as it appeared.U.S. retail sales surged more than expected in June as consumers brushed off tariff concerns. Census Bureau data showed that retail sales were 0.6% higher in June, up from a decrease in May. Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones Newswires had forecasted a more modest 0.2% increase in June. Car sales surged by 1.2% to help lead the increase, coming as economists were closely watching the category for tariff impacts. Spending on building materials and clothing each produced a 0.9% monthly gain in sales. Spending at restaurants and bars was higher by 0.6% in a category that economists say indicates whether consumers are making discretionary purchases. 'Consumers shook off their tariff jitters last month and returned to the stores to buy solidly in nearly all categories of spending. Inflation fears may actually be boosting retail sales today as consumers make purchases before even higher prices hit in the months ahead,' wrote Scott Anderson, chief U.S. economist at BMO Economics. Strong Control Group Sales Points To Healthy Consumer The report showed a 0.5% increase in the 'retail control group,' which excludes purchases of automobiles, gasoline, building materials, and food services and is used to calculate gross domestic product (GDP). Dan North, senior economist at Allianz Trade Americas, said that while retail sales have fluctuated in recent months, the control group has shown that consumer strength has remained consistent. 'It tends to be more stable than the headline, and gives you a better sense altogether of what the consumer is up to, and that has held up pretty well,' North said. Stronger Sales Come Alongside Higher Goods Prices However, the retail sales report isn't adjusted for inflation, meaning that higher prices can also make it look like consumer spending levels are increasing, even if they aren't buying more items. Inflation was higher by 0.3% in June, according to the Consumer Price Index released earlier this week. 'With some of that strength reflecting tariff-driven price increases, our estimate is that inflation-adjusted consumer spending was unchanged in June,' said Michael Pearce, deputy chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics. Spending decreased in some categories that were likely to be hit by tariffs, Pearce noted. 'The rise in retail sales was broad-based, though spending at electronics and furniture stores, both on the frontlines of tariff-related price increases, slipped,' Pearce said. 'While we've seen signs that discretionary spending on travel and hospitality is faltering, retail spending at bars and restaurants rebounded in June, highlighting that the pullback by consumers has not been universal.' Read the original article on Investopedia Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
16-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A 'sidelined' Fed faces a new high-stakes dilemma that echoes its last big error: Morning Brief
Tariffs have finally caught up to the conversation about tariffs. The price increases that businesses and economists have warned about for months have started to seep into the "hard" data, showing inflation accelerated in June for imported products entangled by the new trade policy. While the rising pricing pressures were expected, there are larger implications at play for the Federal Reserve. Tariffs are one of the obstacles standing in the way of the central bank's inflation target of 2%. And the latest confirmation that import duties will raise costs boosted the chances of the Fed remaining on the sidelines. By subscribing, you are agreeing to Yahoo's Condizioni and Informativa sulla privacy Market bets reinforced the idea of a stationary Fed, at least for a few more months. The lock on expectations for no rate change in July intensified to a near certainty, rising to 97%, according to the CME FedWatch tool on Tuesday. "The heating up of inflation in June, while close to expectations, is a step in the wrong direction that will keep the Federal Reserve on the sidelines at the upcoming July FOMC meeting," Scott Anderson, chief US economist at BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a note. And the likelihood of another Fed meeting ending without a cut also increased for September, rising from 37% a week ago to 44%, after the latest inflation report. There's a way to interpret the inflation reading that suggests tariffs will have a much more muted impact on the overall economy than many market observers had feared. It's true that prices for goods, including furniture, clothing, and appliances, ticked up. But overall inflation remained relatively modest. Part of that more optimistic take also views tariff-related inflation as part of a one-time price increase that the Fed should look past, a fleeting moment, rather than a destabilizing paradigm shift leading to escalating prices. It may be — to use a word that may make Fed officials shudder, given the last time they used it and got it wrong — transitory. But there are issues with this rosier read. Even if the tariffs' impact turns out to be momentary, which isn't a sure thing, the fresh rounds of tariff threats and uncertainty around the White House's dealmaking could produce future price shocks, each with its own ripple effects that will take time to suss out and measure. "If the recent tariffs announced/threatened go into effect, it will take a few months for that additional boost to inflation to be felt in goods prices and will keep the Fed on the sideline unless the labor market takes a sudden turn for the worse," Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics, wrote in a note on Tuesday. And if what seems like it could be transitory turns out not to be, then the Fed could find itself replaying its nightmare inflation scenario of the post-COVID inflation boom that bore the inflation monster it's still trying to defeat. For now, inflation isn't hot enough and the labor market isn't cool enough for the Fed to take action. It's possible the tariffs we've seen won't generate lasting inflationary pressures and that the central bank can resume its cutting. But a report that didn't rattle policymakers or the market is also one that invites more waiting. Hamza Shaban is a reporter for Yahoo Finance covering markets and the economy. Follow Hamza on X @hshaban.
Yahoo
15-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Inflation Crushes Hopes That Federal Reserve Will Cut Interest Rates in July
Inflation rose in June, moving further from the Federal Reserve's goal of 2% each year. This flare of inflation will likely discourage the Fed from cutting its influential interest rate later this month. Economists and investors are still hopeful that the central bank will cut its interest rate at the following meeting in uptick in inflation quashed investors' hopes that the Federal Reserve would reduce its influential interest rate when the central bank's policy committee next meets. Inflation rose in June, up 2.7% year-over-year, according to a report released Tuesday morning by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's far higher than the Fed's goal of 2% inflation each year. Flaring inflation could make it harder for the Fed to cut its influential federal funds rate. Higher interest rates are designed to stifle inflation and slow the economy by increasing interest rates on all kinds of loans. "The heating up of inflation in June, while close to expectations, is a step in the wrong direction that will keep the Federal Reserve on the sidelines at the upcoming July FOMC meeting," wrote Scott Anderson, BMO Capital Markets' chief U.S. economist. After the report was released, the chances of a July 30 rate cut fell to 2.6% from an already slim 6.2% the previous day, according to the CME Group's FedWatch tool. The tool forecasts rate movements based on fed funds futures trading data. The Fed has been holding its interest rate at a higher-than-usual level since January, keeping upward pressure on borrowing costs for all kinds of loans. Fed officials have been reluctant to cut interest rates out of concern that tariffs will reignite the high inflation that took hold after the pandemic. Tuesday's report showed signs of tariffs pushing up prices, economists said. However, some central bankers and economists suggest that tariff-related inflation could be temporary. "We still expect the FOMC to begin cutting rates at its September meeting. The gradual softening in the labor market that is ongoing suggests monetary policy is still restrictive, and if tariffs remain near current levels (admittedly a major 'if' in today's policy environment), then we think the worst-case scenarios around the inflation outlook are increasingly unlikely," a group of economists at Wells Fargo Securities wrote in a commentary. Read the original article on Investopedia 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
Business Upturn
10-07-2025
- Business
- Business Upturn
Saddle Up for a Summer Inspired Drink Trio at The Human Bean
By GlobeNewswire Published on July 10, 2025, 01:36 IST Medford, OR, July 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Human Bean is lassoing summer with the launch of three limited-time beverages delivering frontier flavor. From July 9 through September 2, refreshment seekers can mosey on over to any drive-thru location to try rootin' tootin' new drinks that tip their hat to classic American root beer. Cowboy Cold Brew A bold cold brew that kicks harder than a jackrabbit in a burlap sack, but goes down smooth thanks to a cloud of creamy root-beer-flavored cold foam. This rugged beverage delivers a caffeine fix with a playful nod to soda fountain nostalgia. Root Beer Rodeo Float If a root beer float got knocked boots-over-bolo on a buckin' bronco, well—you'd have the Root Beer Rodeo Float. With crisp, bubbly, refreshin' root beer syrup poured over a creamy vanilla smoothie, it's a topsy-turvy take on a classic that you best hold tight. Rootin' Tootin' Dirty Soda For a caffeine-free option, this drink delivers just the right touch of root beer syrup poured over sparkling water and ice. A splash of sweet cream delivers extra creaminess, creating a drink that's bubbly, refreshing, and indulgent all at once. 'We're excited to bring these nostalgic, western flavors to our customers during the peak of summer,' says Scott Anderson, Chief Operating Officer at The Human Bean. 'These drinks capture the spirit of long, carefree summer days while offering something for everyone – whether it's a coffee fix, a sweet treat, or a refreshing soda alternative.' Drinks can be customized with additional flavors, and customers should also be on the lookout for more Dirty Soda combinations launching in July — like Root Beer and Cherry, Mango and Peach, Lavender and Vanilla, and more. The limited-time drink trio will be available at all drive-thru locations through September 2, or while supplies last. ______ About The Human Bean With a passion for creating happy 'Human Beans', the company's drive-thrus around the U.S. have established a reputation for friendly baristas and high-quality coffee, teas, smoothies, granitas, Bright® Energy and good eats. The Human Bean opened its first drive-thru espresso stand in Ashland, Oregon in 1998, and currently supports over 260 locations open or under development in 24 states. Learn more at Attachment Root Beer Flavor Has Arrived at The Human Bean Disclaimer: The above press release comes to you under an arrangement with GlobeNewswire. Business Upturn takes no editorial responsibility for the same. Ahmedabad Plane Crash GlobeNewswire provides press release distribution services globally, with substantial operations in North America and Europe.
Boston Globe
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Presidents vs. Congress: Trump is only the latest to test the War Powers Act
His move has reignited a decades-old debate over the War Powers Act, a law passed in the early 1970s meant to divide authority over military action between Congress and the president. Critics say Trump violated the act by striking with little input from Congress, while supporters argue he responded to an imminent threat and is looking to avoid prolonged conflict. Advertisement Even after Trump announced late Monday that a 'complete and total ceasefire' between Israel and Iran would take effect over the next 24 hours, tensions remained high in Congress over Trump's action. A vote is expected in the Senate later this week on a Democratic Iran war powers resolution that is meant to place a check on Trump when it comes to further entanglement with Iran. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Here's a closer look at what the act does and doesn't do, how past presidents have tested it and how Congress plans to respond: Dividing war powers between Congress and the president Passed in the wake of American involvement in Vietnam, the War Powers Resolution prescribes how the president should work with lawmakers to deploy troops if Congress hasn't already issued a declaration of war. It states that the framers of the Constitution intended for Congress and the President to use its 'collective judgement' to send troops into 'hostilities.' The War Powers Resolution calls for the president 'in every possible instance' to 'consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces.' Advertisement But when Congress enacted the law, 'it didn't install any hard requirements, and it provided a lot of outs,' said Scott Anderson, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. 'Habitual practice for presidents in the last few decades has been to minimally — almost not at all — consult with Congress on a lot of military action,' Anderson said. And 'the language of the statute is so vague and open-ended that it's hard to say it's in clear contradiction' to the War Powers Resolution. Unless a Declaration of War has already been passed or Congress has authorized deploying forces, the president has 48 hours after deploying troops to send a written report to congressional leadership explaining the decision. Trump did so on Monday, sending Congress a letter that said strikes on Iran over the weekend were 'limited in scope and purpose' and 'designed to minimize casualties, deter future attacks and limit the risk of escalation.' In March, when Trump ordered airstrikes in Houthi-held areas in Yemen, he wrote a letter to congressional leadership explaining his rationale and reviewing his orders to the Department of Defense. President Joe Biden wrote nearly 20 letters citing the War Powers Resolution during his term. If Congress doesn't authorize further action within 60 to 90 days, the resolution requires that the president 'terminate any use' of the armed forces. 'That's the hard requirement of the War Powers Resolution,' Anderson said. Advertisement How past presidents have used it Congress hasn't declared war on another country since World War II, but U.S. presidents have filed scores of reports pursuant to the War Powers Resolution since it was enacted in 1973, over President Richard Nixon's veto. Presidents have seized upon some of the vague wording in the War Powers Resolution to justify their actions abroad. In 1980, for example, Jimmy Carter argued that attempting to rescue hostages from Iran didn't require a consultation with Congress, since it wasn't an act of war, according to the Congressional Research Service. President George W. Bush invoked war powers in the weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and persuaded Congress to approve an authorization for the use of military force against Iraq in 2002. Throughout his presidency, President Barack Obama faced pressure to cease operations in Libya after 90 days. But his administration argued that the U.S. use of airpower in Libya didn't rise to the level of 'hostilities' set forth in the War Powers Resolution. What Congress is doing now Trump's actions in Iran have drawn the loudest praise from the right and the sharpest rebukes from the left. But the response hasn't broken cleanly along party lines. Daily developments have also complicated matters. Trump on Sunday raised the possibility of a change in leadership in Iran, before on Monday announcing that Israel and Iran had agreed to a 'complete and total' ceasefire to be phased in over the next 24 hours. Nevertheless, the Senate could vote as soon as this week on a resolution directing the removal of U.S. forces from hostilities against Iran that have not been authorized by Congress. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., the bill's sponsor, told reporters Monday — prior to the ceasefire announcement — that the vote could come 'as early as Wednesday, as late as Friday.' He expects bipartisan backing, though support is still coming together ahead of a classified briefing for senators on Tuesday. Advertisement 'There will be Republicans who will support it,' Kaine said. 'Exactly how many, I don't know.' He added that, 'this is as fluid a vote as I've been involved with during my time here, because the facts are changing every day.' Passing the resolution could prove difficult, especially with Republicans praising Trump after news of the ceasefire broke. Even prior to that, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., defended Trump's actions on Monday and said he's operating within his authority. 'There's always a tension between Congress' power to declare war and the president's power as commander in chief,' said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La. 'But I think the White House contacted its people, as many people as they could.' A similar bipartisan resolution in the House — led by Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna and Republican Rep. Thomas Massie — could follow soon, although Massie signaled Monday that he may no longer pursue it if peace has been reached. Khanna was undeterred. 'In case of a conflict in the future, we need to be on record saying no offensive war in Iran without prior authorization,' Khanna said. 'We still need a vote.' Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Matt Brown contributed to this report.
