While Elon Musk has ended his government cost-cutting initiative that resulted in thousands of federal job cuts, mass layoffs are still roiling corporate America.
Companies are under increasing pressure to trim costs against the backdrop of global economic uncertainty brought on by President Donald Trump‘s tariff policies. Several companies have announced price hikes. Layoffs mark another way to pull back.
Trade tensions have also raised concerns about the general health of the U.S. economy and the job market. While the April jobs reading was better than expected, a separate reading from ADP this week showed private sector hiring hit its lowest level in more than two years.
Though many companies declined to provide specific reasoning for announced workforce reductions — instead lumping the layoffs in with larger cost-cutting strategies or growth plans — tech leaders are starting to cite artificial intelligence as a clear consideration in hiring and headcount adjustments.
Klarna CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski told CNBC last month the fintech company has shrunk its headcount by 40%, in part due to investments in AI. Likewise, Shopify CEO Tobias Lütke told employees in April that they will have to prove why tasks can’t be performed by AI before asking for more headcount and resources.
Here are some of the companies that have announced layoffs in recent weeks:
Procter & Gamble
Pampers and Tide maker Procter & Gamble said on Thursday it will cut 7,000 jobs, or about 15% of its non-manufacturing workforce, over the next two years as part of a restructuring program.
CFO Andre Schulten said during a presentation that the company is planning a broader effort to implement changes across the company’s portfolio, supply chain and corporate organization.
The company did not specify the regions or divisions that would be impacted.
Microsoft
Microsoft said last month it would reduce its workforce by about 6,000 staffers, totaling about 3% of employees across all teams, levels and geographies.
A Microsoft spokesperson told CNBC at the time one objective of the cuts was to reduce layers of management. The company announced a smaller round of layoffs in January that were performance-based. The spokesperson said the May cuts were not related to performance.
Citigroup
People walk by a Citibank location in Manhattan, New York City, on March 1, 2024.
Spencer Platt | Getty Images
Citigroup said in a statement Thursday it plans to reduce its staff by around 3,500 positions in China.
The cuts mostly affect the information technology services unit, which provides software development, testing and maintenance. Some of the impacted roles will be moved to Citi’s technology centers elsewhere, the bank said.
Under the leadership of CEO Jane Fraser, Citi has undertaken a large-scale reorganization with an eye toward profitability and stock performance. The bank consistently underperformed its major bank peers in recent years.
Last month, Reuters reported Walmart was planning to slash about 1,500 jobs in an effort to simplify operations. The teams affected include global technology, operations and U.S.-based e-commerce fulfillment as well as Walmart Connect, the company’s advertising business.
Walmart employs around 1.6 million employees, making it the largest U.S. private employer. CFO John David Rainey told CNBC during an interview last month that Walmart shoppers would likely see price increases at the start of the summer in response to tariffs.
Klarna
Klarna’s Siemiatkowski told employees last month that the Swedish buy now, pay later firm would lay off 10% of its global workforce.
“When we set our business plans for 2022 in the autumn of last year, it was a very different world than the one we are in today,” Siemiatkowski told employees.
The week before that announcement, he told CNBC that Klarna has shrunk its workforce by about 40% due to investments in AI and natural attrition in its workforce.
CrowdStrike
Cybersecurity software maker CrowdStrike announced plans last month to cut 500 employees, or about 5% of its staff.
CEO George Kurtz in a securities filing attributed the move largely to artificial intelligence.
“We’re operating in a market and technology inflection point, with AI reshaping every industry, accelerating threats, and evolving customer needs,” he said, adding that the move was part of the company’s “evolving operating model.”
Disney
A water tower stands at Walt Disney Studios on June 3, 2025 in Burbank, California.
Mario Tama | Getty Images
The Walt Disney Company said earlier this week it plans to cut several hundred employees worldwide across several divisions. The layoffs impact teams in film and TV marketing, TV publicity and casting and development.
The cuts are part of a larger effort to operate more efficiently, a Disney spokesperson said.
Chegg
Online education firm Chegg said last month it would lay off 248 employees, or about 22% of its workforce. The cuts come as AI-powered tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT take over education.
CEO Nathan Schultz said on the company’s May earnings call that the layoffs are part of a cost reduction plan and he expects cost savings of between $45 million and $55 million this year, followed by a further $100 million to $110 million next year.
Amazon
Amazon said in May it would eliminate about 100 jobs in its devices and services division, which includes the Alexa voice assistant, Echo hardware, Ring doorbells and Zoox robotaxis.
A spokesperson for Amazon told CNBC at the time the decision was part of an ongoing effort to “make our teams and programs operate more efficiently.”
The cuts come as CEO Andy Jassy has sought out cost-trimming efforts at the company. Since the beginning of 2022, Amazon has laid off roughly 27,000 employees.
Warner Bros. Discovery
Warner Bros. Discovery will lay off fewer than 100 employees, according to multiple media reports this week.
No particular network or channel would be affected more than others, according to the reports.
The WBD cuts follow the company’s move to reorganize into two divisions: a global linear networks division and a streaming and studios unit. That process was completed during the first quarter.
— CNBC’s Amelia Lucas, Jordan Novet, Anniek Bao, Melissa Repko, Ryan Browne, Annie Palmer, and Reuters contributed to this report.
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.
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.
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.