Connect with us

Economics

Fed board contenders Miran, Bullard say Trump’s tariffs are not causing inflation

Published

on

Marlo Ramirez carries slabs of beef to be prepared for a customer in a grocery store on July 22, 2025 in Miami, Florida.

Joe Raedle | Getty Images

Two economists who are figuring in prominently for vacancies at the Federal Reserve said Tuesday they don’t believe tariffs cause inflation, a view that would be in line with President Donald Trump’s desire for the central bank to cut interest rates.

In separate CNBC interviews, Stephen Miran and James Bullard rejected the idea espoused by many non-White House economists that the duties will lead to longer-term higher prices.

Trump has tapped Miran to fill out the remaining few months of the term of former Governor Adriana Kugler, who left the position Friday. Bullard’s name has surfaced in reports this week as being one of at least a half dozen contenders to fill Chair Jerome Powell‘s seat when his term expires next May. Bullard also is a former St. Louis Fed president.

CEA chair Stephen Miran: There's continues to be no evidence of tariff-induced inflation

Both did not commit to how they would vote on interest rates. However, they praised Trump’s pro-growth agenda and also made comments in line with the president’s stand that inflation is not a problem.

“There just still continues to be no evidence whatsoever of any tariff-induced inflation,” said Miran, chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. “Lots of folks who were expecting … doom and gloom, it just hasn’t panned out, and it continues to not pan out for them.”

The comments came after the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that inflation as measured by the consumer price index was at 2.7% for July, still above the Fed’s 2% target but a shade below Wall Street expectations.

Bullard said data continues to show that Trump’s aggressive tariffs have not led to inflation. He predicted the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee would begin cutting in September and likely lop off a full percentage point from its benchmark interest rate over the next 12 months, which he said would get the rate “close to” neutral.

Former St. Louis Fed Pres. Jim Bullard: The Fed could cut 100 basis points in the next year

“The committee put their rate-cut program on pause when the tariff situation arose six months ago, and now you have six months of evidence,” he said. “I don’t really think tariffs cause inflation. Taxes don’t cause inflation. So what you’re seeing in the data is very muted effects that are one-time increases in the price level.”

Both Miran and Bullard also stressed the importance of Fed independence, an issue that has been tested during both Trump terms as he has publicly and aggressively berated policymakers for not lowering. After the CPI data, Trump again took to Truth Social to repeat his attacks on Powell and his demand for easing. The president has said the Fed should cut by 3 percentage points.

“The damage [Powell] has done by always being Too Late is incalculable,” Trump wrote. “Fortunately, the economy is sooo good that we’ve blown through Powell and the complacent Board.”

Bullard said Trump “is entitled to his views.”

“He’s got long experience in real estate markets. It’s all about borrowing money at the lowest rate possible,” Bullard said. “Good for him. He’s got views, but a lot of people have views, and you know, if you don’t want to hear that, this is probably the wrong job.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending